Excerpts from William Morgan's message of Tue Sep 08 14:25:50 +0200 2009: > We need to figure out what the right behavior should be when replying to > a message that you know is a list message, but where you don't know the > list address. If there's a reliable way of extracting the list address > from another header (From?), we can use that, but I suspect there isn't. > If there isn't a reliable wa, then maybe the original behavior is fine > (don't treat it specially at all).
Well, yes, after all, the broken thing here is the list, that does not have a list-post header. So I guess that what should be fixed is that list, not Sup :-). I did not realize about the list address bug before sending the patch, that's why I asked it to be merged. However, I am afraid you are right, and I think it is worthless to implement this behavior. Cheers, Israel _______________________________________________ sup-talk mailing list [email protected] http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/sup-talk
